Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: NASA gets two military spy telescopes for astronomy - The Washington Post.
3 views
Skip to first unread message
Robert Clark
May 17, 2013, 8:22:18 AM5/17/13
to
Excellent news:
NASA May Launch Donated Spy Satellite Telescope to Mars.
by Mike Wall, SPACE.com Senior WriterDate: 15 May 2013 Time: 04:30 AM
ET
[Quote]
The NRO's gift to NASA of unused spy satellites could enable a new
project termed MOST, or Mars-Orbiting Space Telescope.
...
As it's currently envisioned, MOST would have three main science
instruments — an imaging spectral mapper, a high-resolution imager and
an ultraviolet spectrometer — allowing it to make a broad range of
detailed observations.
The mapper would have a spatial resolution of 0.7 feet (0.21 m)
per pixel at an orbiting altitude of 250 miles (400 kilometers),
McEwen said. That's about 100 times better than the resolution
achieved by a similar instrument aboard NASA's Mars Reconnaissance
Orbiter (MRO), which has been circling the Red Planet since 2006.
...
MOST's imaging instrument would be able to photograph small areas
with a resolution of 3.1 inches (8 centimeters) per pixel — about four
times better than MRO's HiRise instrument (which McEwen leads as
principal investigator).
...
Looking beyond Mars
MOST would also be built to look up and out, beyond the Red Planet
and its two tiny moons.
The telescope's UV spectrometer is envisioned to be similar to
that of the Hubble Space Telescope. But MOST likely wouldn't be able
to study extremely distant objects as well as the famous HST, because
installing a Hubble-like guidance and navigation system that allows a
prolonged lock on such faint targets would raise the price tag
significantly, McEwen said.
Instead, MOST may be optimized to view planets and moons in the
outer solar system.
"We decided to emphasize bright targets, so mostly solar system
targets — monitoring Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune atmospheres,
monitoring volcanism on [Jupiter's moon] Io and cloud patterns on
[Saturn's moon] Titan," McEwen said. "There's an interesting variety
of things you could do in planetary science with it."
[/quote]
http://www.space.com/21064-nasa-donated-spy-telescope-mars.html
Here is the report by McEwen at the "Study on Applications of Large
Space Optics" (SALSO) workshop:
The Mars Orbiting Space Telescope (MOST).
http://salso.msfc.nasa.gov/lib/119Mcewen.pdf
The NRO scopes were reported to be lighter than Hubble, but I was
surprised how much lighter. The study by McEwen uses a mass of only
2,000 kg for the telescope and instruments. This is compared to a mass
of 11,000 kg for the Hubble. In that case it's surprising it's felt
solar electric propulsion would be needed to put it in Mars orbit, not
even to land. Quite likely a Delta IV Heavy could do it, certainly a
Falcon Heavy could.
Other proposed uses for the NRO scopes discussed at the SALSO
workshop available here:
SALSO Abstract Library.
http://salso.msfc.nasa.gov/
Bob Clark
cf.,
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.space.policy,
rec.arts.sf.science
From: Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 11:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: NASA gets two military spy telescopes for astronomy - The
Washington Post.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.science/msg/e5ea3f7d6eedecb4?hl=en
NASA May Launch Donated Spy Satellite Telescope to Mars.
by Mike Wall, SPACE.com Senior WriterDate: 15 May 2013 Time: 04:30 AM
ET
[Quote]
The NRO's gift to NASA of unused spy satellites could enable a new
project termed MOST, or Mars-Orbiting Space Telescope.
...
As it's currently envisioned, MOST would have three main science
instruments — an imaging spectral mapper, a high-resolution imager and
an ultraviolet spectrometer — allowing it to make a broad range of
detailed observations.
The mapper would have a spatial resolution of 0.7 feet (0.21 m)
per pixel at an orbiting altitude of 250 miles (400 kilometers),
McEwen said. That's about 100 times better than the resolution
achieved by a similar instrument aboard NASA's Mars Reconnaissance
Orbiter (MRO), which has been circling the Red Planet since 2006.
...
MOST's imaging instrument would be able to photograph small areas
with a resolution of 3.1 inches (8 centimeters) per pixel — about four
times better than MRO's HiRise instrument (which McEwen leads as
principal investigator).
...
Looking beyond Mars
MOST would also be built to look up and out, beyond the Red Planet
and its two tiny moons.
The telescope's UV spectrometer is envisioned to be similar to
that of the Hubble Space Telescope. But MOST likely wouldn't be able
to study extremely distant objects as well as the famous HST, because
installing a Hubble-like guidance and navigation system that allows a
prolonged lock on such faint targets would raise the price tag
significantly, McEwen said.
Instead, MOST may be optimized to view planets and moons in the
outer solar system.
"We decided to emphasize bright targets, so mostly solar system
targets — monitoring Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune atmospheres,
monitoring volcanism on [Jupiter's moon] Io and cloud patterns on
[Saturn's moon] Titan," McEwen said. "There's an interesting variety
of things you could do in planetary science with it."
[/quote]
http://www.space.com/21064-nasa-donated-spy-telescope-mars.html
Here is the report by McEwen at the "Study on Applications of Large
Space Optics" (SALSO) workshop:
The Mars Orbiting Space Telescope (MOST).
http://salso.msfc.nasa.gov/lib/119Mcewen.pdf
The NRO scopes were reported to be lighter than Hubble, but I was
surprised how much lighter. The study by McEwen uses a mass of only
2,000 kg for the telescope and instruments. This is compared to a mass
of 11,000 kg for the Hubble. In that case it's surprising it's felt
solar electric propulsion would be needed to put it in Mars orbit, not
even to land. Quite likely a Delta IV Heavy could do it, certainly a
Falcon Heavy could.
Other proposed uses for the NRO scopes discussed at the SALSO
workshop available here:
SALSO Abstract Library.
http://salso.msfc.nasa.gov/
Bob Clark
cf.,
Newsgroups: sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.space.policy,
rec.arts.sf.science
From: Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 11:14:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: NASA gets two military spy telescopes for astronomy - The
Washington Post.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.science/msg/e5ea3f7d6eedecb4?hl=en
Yousuf Khan
May 18, 2013, 11:19:24 AM5/18/13
to
On 17/05/2013 6:22 PM, Robert Clark wrote:
> Excellent news:
>
> NASA May Launch Donated Spy Satellite Telescope to Mars.
> by Mike Wall, SPACE.com Senior WriterDate: 15 May 2013 Time: 04:30 AM
> ET
> [Quote]
> The NRO's gift to NASA of unused spy satellites could enable a new
> project termed MOST, or Mars-Orbiting Space Telescope.
> ...
> As it's currently envisioned, MOST would have three main science
> instruments � an imaging spectral mapper, a high-resolution imager and
> Excellent news:
>
> NASA May Launch Donated Spy Satellite Telescope to Mars.
> by Mike Wall, SPACE.com Senior WriterDate: 15 May 2013 Time: 04:30 AM
> ET
> [Quote]
> The NRO's gift to NASA of unused spy satellites could enable a new
> project termed MOST, or Mars-Orbiting Space Telescope.
> ...
> As it's currently envisioned, MOST would have three main science
> an ultraviolet spectrometer � allowing it to make a broad range of
> detailed observations.
> The mapper would have a spatial resolution of 0.7 feet (0.21 m)
> per pixel at an orbiting altitude of 250 miles (400 kilometers),
> McEwen said. That's about 100 times better than the resolution
> achieved by a similar instrument aboard NASA's Mars Reconnaissance
> Orbiter (MRO), which has been circling the Red Planet since 2006.
Hey, why not? As a spy satellite it was originally intended to look down
> The mapper would have a spatial resolution of 0.7 feet (0.21 m)
> per pixel at an orbiting altitude of 250 miles (400 kilometers),
> McEwen said. That's about 100 times better than the resolution
> achieved by a similar instrument aboard NASA's Mars Reconnaissance
> Orbiter (MRO), which has been circling the Red Planet since 2006.
on the ground on Earth, now it can still look down on the ground, on
Mars this time. :)
Launching so much long-term satellite equipment on the various Solar
System bodies, like Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Mercury, etc. are really
putting our flag down on our ownership of this entire Solar System, not
just Earth.
> Looking beyond Mars
> MOST would also be built to look up and out, beyond the Red Planet
> and its two tiny moons.
> The telescope's UV spectrometer is envisioned to be similar to
> that of the Hubble Space Telescope. But MOST likely wouldn't be able
> to study extremely distant objects as well as the famous HST, because
> installing a Hubble-like guidance and navigation system that allows a
> prolonged lock on such faint targets would raise the price tag
> significantly, McEwen said.
> Instead, MOST may be optimized to view planets and moons in the
> outer solar system.
long-distance objects anyways, this way you can concentrate JWST's
resources on stuff outside the solar system, and this thing can look at
stuff inside it.
Yousuf Khan
bob haller
May 18, 2013, 1:20:03 PM5/18/13
to
On May 18, 11:19 am, Yousuf Khan <bbb...@spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 17/05/2013 6:22 PM, Robert Clark wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Excellent news:
>
> > NASA May Launch Donated Spy Satellite Telescope to Mars.
> > by Mike Wall, SPACE.com Senior WriterDate: 15 May 2013 Time: 04:30 AM
> > ET
> > [Quote]
> > The NRO's gift to NASA of unused spy satellites could enable a new
> > project termed MOST, or Mars-Orbiting Space Telescope.
> > ...
> > As it's currently envisioned, MOST would have three main science
> > instruments — an imaging spectral mapper, a high-resolution imager and
> On 17/05/2013 6:22 PM, Robert Clark wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Excellent news:
>
> > NASA May Launch Donated Spy Satellite Telescope to Mars.
> > by Mike Wall, SPACE.com Senior WriterDate: 15 May 2013 Time: 04:30 AM
> > ET
> > [Quote]
> > The NRO's gift to NASA of unused spy satellites could enable a new
> > project termed MOST, or Mars-Orbiting Space Telescope.
> > ...
> > As it's currently envisioned, MOST would have three main science
> > an ultraviolet spectrometer — allowing it to make a broad range of
at........
Message has been deleted
Brian Thorn
May 18, 2013, 4:05:09 PM5/18/13
to
On Sat, 18 May 2013 10:20:03 -0700 (PDT), bob haller <hal...@aol.com>
wrote:
>Geez i suggested sending one of these to mars and was laughed
>at........
You sometimes have a nugget of a good idea, Bob. But you usually jump
off the cliff with lots of nonsense to justify it.
Regardless, I doubt MOST will ever happen. It would be like sending a
KH-11 or Hubble to Mars and would make MRO (a pretty big orbiter) look
tiny. What kind of rocket are we going to send this to Mars on, SLS?
How are we going to get back that much bandwidth of KH-11/Hubble class
images from Mars?
And wait until Henry Spencer and the CSA hear that NASA is trying to
steal the "MOST" name...
A more basic Earth-orbiting telescope is a far better use for this
hardware.
Brian
wrote:
>Geez i suggested sending one of these to mars and was laughed
>at........
off the cliff with lots of nonsense to justify it.
Regardless, I doubt MOST will ever happen. It would be like sending a
KH-11 or Hubble to Mars and would make MRO (a pretty big orbiter) look
tiny. What kind of rocket are we going to send this to Mars on, SLS?
How are we going to get back that much bandwidth of KH-11/Hubble class
images from Mars?
And wait until Henry Spencer and the CSA hear that NASA is trying to
steal the "MOST" name...
A more basic Earth-orbiting telescope is a far better use for this
hardware.
Brian
bob haller
May 18, 2013, 6:28:31 PM5/18/13
to
> >Geez i suggested sending one of these to mars and was laughed
> >at........
>
> conjunction with that 'suggestion'.
>
My track record stands on its accuracy.:)
could a shuttle get stuck at statiion,,,,,,,, laughter, then columbia,
then nasa plans for a shuttle stuck at station
hey there have been too many fying catches, too much schedule
pressure, were going to a lose a shuttle... then columbia dies, cause?
too much schedule pressure
hey send a leftover spy sat to mars.LAUGHTER. Now they are taling of
doing just that:)
hey chemical propulsion for manned mars mission wouldnt work.
Now bolden says the same.
need I go on??????????
Meanwhile fred j cueless throws insults and offers nothing but useless
noise
Message has been deleted
bob haller
May 19, 2013, 9:35:10 AM5/19/13
to
>
> >Geez i suggested sending one of these to mars and was laughed
> >at........
>
> You were laughed at because you said such egregiously stupid things in
> conjunction with that 'suggestion'.
>
> This is your perpetual problem, Bobbert. You say something surrounded
> conjunction with that 'suggestion'.
>
> with idiotic ideas, people call you a moron, and later you only
> remember the one tiny similarity between what you said and what is
> happening.
>
so do some research and prove it, search the archives provide links
and post exactly I said that was idiotic......
my idea was to repurpose at least one of these spy sats for use in
mars orbit.
i was laughed at. your making the claim no prove it!
bob haller
May 19, 2013, 9:37:40 AM5/19/13
to
On May 18, 4:05 pm, Brian Thorn <bthor...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 10:20:03 -0700 (PDT), bob haller <hall...@aol.com>
bandwith can be increased, it may be possible to compress the info.
DBS sats carry many more channels than they were capable of less than
10 years ago thanks to improvements in compression
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 10:20:03 -0700 (PDT), bob haller <hall...@aol.com>
DBS sats carry many more channels than they were capable of less than
10 years ago thanks to improvements in compression
Thomas Womack
May 19, 2013, 12:38:14 PM5/19/13
to
In article <3enfp89iun4irh3ve...@4ax.com>,
up on a Delta 4 with a solar-electric propulsion system on the
spacecraft, and creep up slowly on Mars.
Tom
Brian Thorn <btho...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 18 May 2013 10:20:03 -0700 (PDT), bob haller <hal...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>Geez i suggested sending one of these to mars and was laughed
>>at........
>
>You sometimes have a nugget of a good idea, Bob. But you usually jump
>off the cliff with lots of nonsense to justify it.
>
>Regardless, I doubt MOST will ever happen. It would be like sending a
>KH-11 or Hubble to Mars and would make MRO (a pretty big orbiter) look
>tiny. What kind of rocket are we going to send this to Mars on, SLS?
The scope is light (two tonnes or so); I think the plan is to send it
>On Sat, 18 May 2013 10:20:03 -0700 (PDT), bob haller <hal...@aol.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>>Geez i suggested sending one of these to mars and was laughed
>>at........
>
>You sometimes have a nugget of a good idea, Bob. But you usually jump
>off the cliff with lots of nonsense to justify it.
>
>Regardless, I doubt MOST will ever happen. It would be like sending a
>KH-11 or Hubble to Mars and would make MRO (a pretty big orbiter) look
>tiny. What kind of rocket are we going to send this to Mars on, SLS?
up on a Delta 4 with a solar-electric propulsion system on the
spacecraft, and creep up slowly on Mars.
Tom
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com
May 19, 2013, 2:28:53 PM5/19/13
to
stuff.
There is still however the minor issue of the maximum, practical, achievable
bandwidth of a data link between Earth and Mars which is far less than
that of Earth to Earth orbit.
--
Jim Pennino
Wayne Throop
May 19, 2013, 8:57:24 PM5/19/13
to
: Thomas Womack <two...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
: The scope is light (two tonnes or so); I think the plan is to send it
UNTIL SUDDENLY I WAS UPON HIM!"
: The scope is light (two tonnes or so); I think the plan is to send it
: up on a Delta 4 with a solar-electric propulsion system on the
: spacecraft, and creep up slowly on Mars.
"Slowly I turned, step by step, inch by inch,
: spacecraft, and creep up slowly on Mars.
UNTIL SUDDENLY I WAS UPON HIM!"
Me
Jun 5, 2013, 1:37:54 PM6/5/13
to
On May 17, 8:22 am, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
nd its two tiny moons.
> Here is the report by McEwen at the "Study on Applications of Large
> Space Optics" (SALSO) workshop:
>
> The Mars Orbiting Space Telescope (MOST).http://salso.msfc.nasa.gov/lib/119Mcewen.pdf
know what he is talking about.
The 2000kg does not include the spacecraft supporting it, where as HST
mass (11,000) is for the whole spacecraft, which also has more
instruments. The actual mass of the NRO telescopes are 1700kg and the
HST optical telescope assembly, which includes the fine guidance
sensors, is 4000kg. So your comparison is wrong. And you are a math
teacher? What other incorrect information are you teaching?
nd its two tiny moons.
> Here is the report by McEwen at the "Study on Applications of Large
> Space Optics" (SALSO) workshop:
>
>
> The NRO scopes were reported to be lighter than Hubble, but I was
> surprised how much lighter. The study by McEwen uses a mass of only
> 2,000 kg for the telescope and instruments. This is compared to a mass
> of 11,000 kg for the Hubble. In that case it's surprising it's felt
> solar electric propulsion would be needed to put it in Mars orbit, not
> even to land. Quite likely a Delta IV Heavy could do it, certainly a
> Falcon Heavy could.
>
Just another case that shows that Clark is f'ing clueless and doesn't
> The NRO scopes were reported to be lighter than Hubble, but I was
> surprised how much lighter. The study by McEwen uses a mass of only
> 2,000 kg for the telescope and instruments. This is compared to a mass
> of 11,000 kg for the Hubble. In that case it's surprising it's felt
> solar electric propulsion would be needed to put it in Mars orbit, not
> even to land. Quite likely a Delta IV Heavy could do it, certainly a
> Falcon Heavy could.
>
know what he is talking about.
The 2000kg does not include the spacecraft supporting it, where as HST
mass (11,000) is for the whole spacecraft, which also has more
instruments. The actual mass of the NRO telescopes are 1700kg and the
HST optical telescope assembly, which includes the fine guidance
sensors, is 4000kg. So your comparison is wrong. And you are a math
teacher? What other incorrect information are you teaching?
Robert Clark
Jun 6, 2013, 4:58:48 PM6/6/13
to
telescope mass as can be verified by anyone who actually *reads* the
report.
In any case, it's a moot point, as NASA has decided to use the NRO
scopes only for astrophysics missions, not for planetary missions such
as for observing Mars :-(
Only NASA Astrophysics Remains in Running for Donated NRO Telescope —
For Now.
By Dan Leone | Jun. 4, 2013
http://www.spacenews.com/article/civil-space/35628only-nasa-astrophysics-remains-in-running-for-donated-nro-telescope-%E2%80%94-for#.Ua9QPBkT8-9
Bob Clark
Me
Jun 19, 2013, 12:56:34 PM6/19/13
to
thing. The 2000kg is only for the telescope, that does not include
the spacecraft bus which contains solar arrays, propellant, attitude
control system, data systems, etc.
The following from the McEwen proposal shows that you can't read and
comprehend:
"The bus is a combination of flight proven heritage components and
subsystems configured for the Large Optical Payload, with the
inclusion of electric propulsion (EP) for efficient delivery of the
observatory to Mars orbit. The spacecraft accommodates a 2000 kg
payload/instrument mass and >5500 W"
The 2000kg payload/instrument mass is the Large Optical Payload, which
is only part of the spacecraft total mass.
Me
Jun 19, 2013, 1:02:18 PM6/19/13
to
On Jun 6, 4:58 pm, Robert Clark <rgregorycl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Just have to reiterate that you are an idiot and I can not believe
that you have a job where teach people. The people paying you have a
legitimate claim to fire you for incompetence and your students could
sue the school.
0 new messages